logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2020.01.31 2019노941
사기등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was in a state of mental disability at the time of the instant crime.

In addition, the punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background leading up to the instant crime, the means and methods of committing the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, it is not deemed that the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime.

The defendant's mental disorder is not accepted.

B. The determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance court that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness taken by our Criminal Procedure Act and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, it is reasonable to reverse the unfair judgment of the first instance court only in cases where it is deemed that the judgment of the first instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing in the course of the first instance sentencing review and the sentencing criteria, etc., or where it is deemed unfair to maintain the first instance sentencing as it is in full view of the materials newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court in the absence of such exceptional circumstances.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no significant change in circumstances that may consider the sentencing of Defendant after the lower judgment.

Examining the conditions of sentencing and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the instant records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentence is to be imposed even if the Defendant considered all the circumstances asserted as the grounds for appeal.

arrow